This actually looks pretty cool. I can't really express how much I love that atrium/windowed area in the second screen shot, it looks great. I'm not sure if it was in the original one by Psy, but still looks true to the TF2 art style.

I haven't done that much changes to this version(a3).
Some mayor things that I changed are:
- widened the area below the point
- closed the sniper window next to the balcony (because it was a really unfair sniper spot)

Thanks Ravage for this little help. I really like some of the stuff you did and I will definitely apply some changes to my version.

I played this map during the gameday, it was fun, but the matches would usually heavily favor the team that capped first and when both teams were being defensive, it would be stalemate until someone finally managed to cap the point.
I think this might be why:

There is no way to push enemy team very effectively or flank them to get rid of their teleporters and sentries. You have two ramps that put you on point that is fairly open and one tunnel that puts you on lower ground middle of all defensive positions for the defending team. Usually attacking team would endlessly try to push on the point and only occasional lucky player managed to get behind the enemy team, when everyone was busy with rest of his team. Point doesn't also have any cover on it, so once you are on the point, not only you have to deal with everyone on balconies around the point, you have to watch out for snipers sniping from the two rather long and safe sightlines. (But snipers might not be that much of a problem if attackers can flank defenders more easily)

Other problem with the map, is this spawn exit that people seem to use most. (No idea why, a lot of people just seem to prefer this exit) When they come trough the door, they see this:

Just one door with light on top of it, drawing their attention to it. People using this exit keep using this and only this route, only to notice after few rounds that there is other routes near this one. So i suggest you add big arrow sign here.

I think a little cover on the point would be good.
Since you have to jump anyway, to get off the point, it shouldn't make such a big difference from that perspective.

I also thought about some flank routes. I don't wanna implement both of those.
The right one (blue side) would easily give the attacker team height advantage,
while the left one would be useful for killing teleporters/get behind the lines.

We played Highpass again today, and I think my first solution for cover one the point was pretty bad.
Here is why:

Players can't shoot/see incoming enemies anymore, they are kind of trapped on the point.

I'm not 100% happy with this new solution, but I think it's much better anyway.
The concrete block (red) is making the soldier class much more interesting, since he can now jump on something to do more damage. It would also take away the feeling of a too empty point, that is pretty boring and open ATM.

We played Highpass again today, and I think my first solution for cover one the point was pretty bad.
Here is why:

Players can't shoot/see incoming enemies anymore, they are kind of trapped on the point.

I'm not 100% happy with this new solution, but I think it's much better anyway.
The concrete block (red) is making the soldier class much more interesting, since he can now jump on something to do more damage. It would also take away the feeling of a too empty point, that is pretty boring and open ATM.

Click to expand...

One of the reasons that I hate King of the Hill in general is that maps usually fall into 1 of 2 categories:

a) There is insufficient width at the middle to allow for flanking, and the map degenerates into a giant cluster of spam in the middle. Think Viaduct.

b) There is too much width at the middle and too many flanking routes, and the map degenerates into team deathmatch, no one cares about the point. Think Harvest.

At the moment, I feel that Highpass falls into category A. Obviously a healthy balance between the two would be best, but at the moment all players must be funnelled through the middle bridge, which doesn't do very much for gameplay. Others may have other ideas. Certainly more cover around the point will help to differentiate between the left and right routes around the bridge, but I am not sure whether it will be enough.

The middle of the map just screams scouts and snipers, which is unfortunate because so many of the other classes are not useful until the opposing team has been pushed back past the point.

This might be picky but shouldn't the overlay for the truck tracks be closer together? You have them the same width of the doors - meaning that if the truck tires were on them then the truck (which is usually bigger than the tires) would not be able to fit through the doors.

This might be picky but shouldn't the overlay for the truck tracks be closer together? You have them the same width of the doors - meaning that if the truck tires were on them then the truck (which is usually bigger than the tires) would not be able to fit through the doors.

Click to expand...

Oh Jesus,
good you pointed that out!
I just can't imagine what could have happened!

Also, it feels a bit overwhelming being in the middle of all the action with the two high side routes. You always feel like you are at a disadvantage on the point because of the height advantage the other team constantly has. There always seems to be an enemy up there.

I tested the game in a 6vs6 mix today. And someone said, that it would be better to remove that things and just allow the player to run off the point.
I don't know if this would be so good. But if you think that they block the sight line it would be another reason to remove them.

However, you have to see it from the other side. It's also additional cover for the players on the point.

Also, it feels a bit overwhelming being in the middle of all the action with the two high side routes. You always feel like you are at a disadvantage on the point because of the height advantage the other team constantly has. There always seems to be an enemy up there.

Click to expand...

I just can agree with that. But I don't really see this as a big problem.
Since the attacking team needs a bit of an advantage (besides the spawn times).